Subscribe To

Search This Blog

Tuesday, January 20, 2015

It's not hard to imagine a decade or
so ago an Atlanta fire chief getting himself fired for writing a book that
advocated for same-sex marriage, basing his argument on the LGBT-endorsing
position of his Episcopal Church. Protestors would have rightly defended the
chief's First Amendment freedom of speech and free exercise of religion.

If the state at the time had passed a
law mirroring the federal Religious Freedom Restoration Act, a hugely
bipartisan measure signed into law by Bill Clinton, a court case could have
determined whether the government could demonstrate a compelling interest in
firing the chief, and whether it had taken the least restrictive means to
fulfill that interest.

Perhaps the courts would have ruled
that the government either lacked a compelling interest or had taken a harsher
path than necessary to enforce its interest, and the chief could have been
reinstated on the First Amendment grounds of religious freedom.

The key is to view First Amendment
speech and religious freedoms not through the lens of what particular belief is
being expressed or exercised, but as a cornerstone of our freedoms in this
democratic republic.

A Supreme Court case over an Arizona town's discriminatory
treatment of church signs serves as a reminder of the inseparability of First
Amendment free speech and religious exercise.

In an effort to cabin the influence of faith values in the public
square and to force compliance with faith-violating government policies and
ideologies, some have suggested that the First Amendment merely protects the
right to privately hold beliefs about God or to pray.

That would be a meaningless protection. Even the most oppressive
government cannot possibly regulate our private thoughts or prayer; it can only
regulate the expression and the exercise of our beliefs through public speech
and actions.

That's why the First Amendment provides that government may not
prohibit the free exercise of faith, whether in speech or in actions. Public
policy advocates of all stripes do well to remember that if the government can
restrict, coerce and punish one group or viewpoint today, it can restrict,
coerce and punish the opposite tomorrow.

I have worked on a number of issues with Rep. Franks and have
noted his passionate dedication to the unborn. He made the following comments about this
bill yesterday:

“More than 18,000 ‘very late term’ abortions are performed every year on perfectly healthy unborn babies in America. These are innocent and defenseless children who can not only feel pain, but who can survive outside of the womb in most cases, and who are torturously killed without even basic anesthesia.Many of them cry and scream as they die, but because it is amniotic fluid going over their vocal cords instead of air, we don’t hear them.

“Late term Abortion in America has its defenders, but no true or principled defense.The Pain Capable Unborn Child Protection Act seeks to afford basic protection to mothers and their unborn babies entering the sixth month of gestation.

Rep. Trent Franks

“I would just deeply encourage all interested parties, including fair-minded reporters, to simply read this bill.It is one all humane Americans can support if they understand it for themselves.

“Throughout America's history, the hearts of the American people have been moved with compassion when they discover a theretofore hidden class of victims, once they grasp both the humanity of the victims and the inhumanity of what is being done to them.

“America is on the cusp of another such realization.”

Rep. Blackburn said the following:

“We have a moral obligation to end dangerous
late-term abortions in order to protect women and these precious babies from
criminals like Kermit Gosnell and others who prey on the most vulnerable in our
society,” Blackburn said. “The United States is one of the few remaining
countries in the world that allows abortion after 20 weeks. That is why today
we renew our efforts to protect the lives of babies and their mothers with the
introduction of the Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act. Rep. Franks and I
have been a good team moving this legislation through the House as we continue
to lead the fight to ensure the unborn are provided the same protections that
all human life deserves.”